💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (August Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • Inter-state Water disputes in India

    Cauvery

    Central Idea

    • Tamil Nadu has urged the Supreme Court to compel Karnataka to release 24,000 cusecs of water immediately.
    • The state seeks the release of 36.76 TMC for September 2023, as per the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal’s (CWDT) award.

    About Cauvery River

    • The Cauvery River, also spelled as ‘Kaveri’ and known as ‘Ponni’ in Tamil, originates from Talakaveri in the Brahmagiri range located in Karnataka’s Kodagu district.
    • It spans approximately 800 km, traversing through the states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, until it eventually reaches the Bay of Bengal.
    • The river’s catchment area covers regions in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, and the Union Territory of Pondicherry.
    • Key tributaries that join the Cauvery include Harangi, Hemavati, Kabini, Suvarnavathi, and Bhavani.
    • Distinguishing it from other rivers in South India, the Cauvery remains perennial due to its dual reliance on both advancing and retreating monsoons for rainfall.

     

    Cauvery Water Dispute: Historical Background

    • 1892 Onset: The water dispute dates back to 1892 between the British-ruled Madras Presidency and the princely state of Mysore (now Karnataka).
    • 1924 Agreement: A 50-year agreement mediated by the British aimed to quell tensions but merely laid the groundwork for future disagreements.
    • Post-Independence Battles: Karnataka’s dam constructions in the 1960s-80s sparked Tamil Nadu’s appeal to the Supreme Court. The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) followed.
    • Interim Measures: The Cauvery River Authority (CRA) in 1998 implemented interim orders. Contentious issues persisted despite CWDT’s 2013 award.
    • Final Award: The CWDT’s award in 2013 allocated water quantities for Tamil Nadu (419 TMC), Karnataka (270 TMC), Kerala (30 TMC), and Puducherry (7 TMC).

    Water Sharing Criteria

    • Monthly Schedule: Karnataka, the upper riparian state, is mandated to provide Tamil Nadu with a specified water quantity each month.
    • Annual Allocation: In a “normal” year, Karnataka must provide 177.25 TMC to Tamil Nadu, of which 123.14 TMC is during the southwest monsoon.
    • Challenges: The contentious period is the monsoon when disagreements often arise due to varying rainfall.

    Constitutional Provisions for Water Sharing

    • Article 262: Empowers Parliament to address inter-State river disputes; IRWD Act, 1956 enacted under this article.
    • Seventh Schedule: Defines the legislative authority over water resources in Entry 17 (State List) and Entry 56 (Union List).

    Resolving Cauvery Water Sharing

    (A) Supreme Court’s 2018 Verdict

    • Cauvery as National Asset: The Supreme Court declared Cauvery a “national asset” and upheld inter-State river water equality.
    • Allocation Adjustments: The Court noted deficiencies in CWDT’s assessment, leading to Karnataka receiving marginal relief and Tamil Nadu’s allocation reduced to 177.25 TMC.
    • Formation of CMB: The Court directed the establishment of the Cauvery Management Board (CMB) for effective implementation of orders.

    (B) Cauvery Water Management Scheme

    • CWMA Establishment: The Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) was formed to regulate water releases with assistance from the Cauvery Water Regulation Committee (CWRC).
    • Permanent and Technical Bodies: CWMA oversees water regulation, while CWRC ensures data collection and implementation of the final award.

    Current Status and Future Implications:

    • Ongoing Challenge: The Cauvery water dispute remains an ongoing challenge with historical and legal dimensions.
    • Resource Management: The establishment of CWMA and CWRC aims to address the dispute through effective water management.
    • Continued Struggle: The dispute underscores the complexity of water sharing in a federal system and the need for equitable solutions.

    Tamil Nadu’s Contention

    • CWMA’s Decision: The CWMA sought 10,000 cusecs for 15 days from Karnataka, but Karnataka proposed only 8,000 cusecs up to August 22.
    • Previous Agreement: Karnataka’s refusal to adhere to the earlier agreement of 15,000 cusecs for 15 days at the CWRC meeting irked Tamil Nadu.
    • Distress-sharing Formula: TN CM supports a distress-sharing formula, but Karnataka has not embraced it.

    Karnataka’s Perspective

    • Rainfall Deficit: Karnataka claims lower rainfall in Cauvery’s catchment areas, including Kerala, leading to reduced inflow into its reservoirs.
    • Challenging Situation: Karnataka stated that it couldn’t release water as the reservoirs received less inflow this year.
    • Lack of Consistency: Despite Karnataka’s endorsing distress-sharing, the state declined to accept the formula.

    Future Scenario

    • Tamil Nadu’s Concerns: The Mettur reservoir’s storage is critically low, impacting farmers and the upcoming kuruvai crop.
    • Water Shortage: The current water availability may last only 10 days, considering dead storage and drinking water needs.
    • Awaiting Supreme Court: The case’s outcome now rests with the Supreme Court’s interpretation and decision.
    • Need for a Resolution: The pressing need for a mutually acceptable distress-sharing formula is evident.

    Ongoing Challenges and Factors Prolonging the Dispute:

    • Erratic Water Levels: Flood-drought cycles, pollution, and groundwater depletion have led to unpredictable water levels.
    • Idealistic Calculations: SC’s verdict relies on favorable conditions that often do not align with reality.
    • Dependency and Population: Both states rely heavily on the river, causing conflicting water needs for urban areas and agriculture.
    • Inefficient Water Use: Inefficient irrigation methods lead to low crop productivity per unit of water used.
    • Hydropolitics and Delays: Political parties capitalize on water disputes for mobilization. Prolonged tribunal adjudications contribute to delays.

     

    Global Lessons

    1. Good Water Neighbors Project: Collaboration between Israelis, Jordanians, and Palestinians demonstrates the power of dialogue and cooperation for shared water resources.
    2. Nile Basin Initiative: Regional partnership among Nile Basin countries showcases cooperation for equitable water management, enhancing prosperity and peace.

    Conclusion

    • The Cauvery River dispute is a microcosm of water-related challenges in India.
    • To address this century-old struggle, collaborative efforts, sustainable practices, and empowered community involvement are essential.
    • By learning from global examples and innovating locally, a future of equitable water allocation, prosperity, and harmony can be envisioned.

  • Why the minimum age for Indian MPs must be brought down to 21?

    What’s the news?

    • The 132nd Report on Election Process and Reform, presented to the Rajya Sabha in August 2023, recommends aligning the minimum age for candidacy with the voting age of 18.

    Central idea

    • A Parliamentary Committee has proposed reducing the age restriction on MPs and MLAs to 18 years. Though the EC has opposed the proposal, Constituent Assembly debates show several leaders back then favored lower age criteria for our lawmakers. Calling the current criteria outdated, the committee argued that legislative bodies could benefit from a wider range of perspectives.

    Background

    • On May 18, 1949, during the heated deliberations of India’s Constituent Assembly, responsible for drafting the nation’s Constitution, a pivotal debate emerged.
    • The focus was the insertion of an Article outlining criteria for prospective parliamentarians’ minimum age.
    • The motion proposed setting 25 years as the entry age for the Lok Sabha and 35 years for the Rajya Sabha.
    • Amidst this discourse, Durgabai Deshmukh, a prominent figure in India’s freedom struggle and an advocate for women’s emancipation, proposed an amendment.
    • Her amendment aimed to lower the minimum age for Rajya Sabha candidacy from 35 to 30, reflecting changing times and evolving youth engagement in civic matters.
    • The amendment’s adoption led to the incorporation of Article 84 and Article 173 in the Constitution, mandating 25 and 30 years as the minimum age for entry into the lower and upper houses, respectively, at both the central and state levels.

    A Global Perspective on Youth Participation

    • The United Nations Human Rights Council’s 2018 report highlights challenges faced by youth in accessing their rights.
    • Less than 2% of parliamentarians worldwide are under 30, indicating a lack of youth representation.
    • Countries like the UK, Australia, and Canada have embraced young candidates with innovative ideas and fresh perspectives.
    • European nations such as Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, and Ireland have set lower minimum age requirements for candidates.
    • Fridays for the Future, led by Greta Thunberg, exemplifies the influence of youth-led activism on global issues.

    Youth and Political Participation in India

    • Student Politics and University Campuses:
      • University campuses, traditionally seen as breeding grounds for free debate and critical thinking, have played a pivotal role in nurturing young leaders.
      • The Lyngdoh Committee’s recommendations in 2012, which introduced upper age limits for student union elections, marked a transformative shift.
      • Recent statistics reveal that student union office-bearers at top Indian universities have an average age of 22.5 years, reflecting more youthful leadership.
    • Panchayat-Level Representation:
      • At the grassroots level, efforts to infuse youth representation have resulted in significant positive changes.
      • In various states, a growing number of individuals aged 21 and above have found representation in roles such as village pradhan and block pramukh.
      • This demonstrates a trend towards acknowledging the capabilities and perspectives of younger individuals in local governance.
    • Parliamentary Representation:
      • However, this progressive trend is not consistently reflected at the national parliamentary level.
      • An analysis of India’s parliamentary history shows a decline in the percentage of MPs aged 25–40 from 26% in the first Lok Sabha to 12% in the current 17th Lok Sabha.
      • Despite India’s young country status, with 65% of the population below 35 years old, the average age of MPs remains relatively high.

    The Impact of Youth Representation: Amplifying Progressive Agendas

    • Visibility of Youth-Centric Issues:
      • Diverse representation in parliament ensures increased visibility of issues pertinent to youth.
      • The long-standing demand for women’s reservation quotas highlights the effectiveness of targeted representation in addressing gender-specific concerns.
      • Similarly, youth representatives can champion matters like technology, unemployment, and education, shaping policies that resonate with younger generations.
    • Contemporary Relevance and Innovation:
      • Young parliamentarians are poised to bring fresh perspectives and innovative solutions to complex problems.
      • Issues like climate change, technology, and socio-economic disparities require dynamic approaches that youth are well-equipped to provide.
      • Their engagement can foster debates that reflect the current aspirations and challenges of the population.
    • Empowerment of Underrepresented Groups:
      • Youth representation also holds the promise of empowering marginalized and minority groups.
      • The inclusivity brought about by youth engagement ensures that the concerns of various communities are adequately addressed.
      • This can contribute to a more equitable and diverse governance approach.
    • Challenging Traditional Notions:
      • The presence of young parliamentarians challenges traditional notions that associate political competence solely with age.
      • Global examples of successful young leaders breaking barriers underscores the capacity of youth to drive change.
      • Age should not be a barrier to representation when youth demonstrate awareness, dedication, and commitment to their responsibilities.

    Challenges Hindering Youth Inclusion

    • Experience and Maturity Concerns:
      • Critics contend that younger candidates may lack the life experience and maturity required to make informed decisions on complex issues.
      • The belief that political competence is directly proportional to age is deeply ingrained, presenting a challenge to reform efforts.
    • Entrenched Norms and Resistance:
      • Prevailing norms link effective leadership with advanced age, creating resistance to embracing younger candidates.
      • Societal skepticism toward entrusting significant responsibilities to youth can impede the acceptance of policy changes.
    • Divergence from International Trends:
      • The Election Commission’s cautious stance on lowering the minimum candidacy age contrasts with global trends.
      • Several democracies have successfully integrated younger leaders, tapping into their fresh perspectives and innovative thinking.
    • Balancing Youthful Vigor and Expertise:
      • Striking a balance between the energy of youth and the wisdom gained from experience remains a challenge.
      • Effective leadership requires not only innovative ideas but also a nuanced understanding of the intricacies of governance.
    • Perception of Representation Bias:
      • Concerns exist that youth-centric representation might overshadow the needs of other demographic groups.
      • Addressing this perception and ensuring comprehensive policy formulation are essential for garnering broad support.
    • Cultural and Mindset shifts:
      • Overcoming deep-rooted beliefs that equate age with political competence demands a cultural shift.
      • Effective awareness campaigns can challenge stereotypes and create a more inclusive environment for younger leaders.

    Addressing the Age Discrepancy

    • The 132nd Report on Election Process and Reform, presented to the Rajya Sabha in August 2023, recommends aligning the minimum age for candidacy with the voting age of 18.
    • The report highlights global practices and underscores the significance of young parliamentarians voicing contemporary issues.

    Way forward

    • Policy Alignment and Adaptation: Reassess existing policies to align the minimum candidacy age with the voting age, promoting consistency and inclusivity.
    • Youth-Centric Educational Initiatives: Establish comprehensive political education programs and leadership training to equip young aspirants with essential governance skills.
    • Cross-Generational Mentorship: Facilitate intergenerational dialogue to combine experience with innovation, allowing for a holistic approach to decision-making.
    • Incentivized Youth Participation: Encourage political parties to integrate young candidates into their election strategies through incentives and tangible support.
    • Collaborative Advocacy Efforts: Engage stakeholders in advocacy campaigns, leveraging global examples to advocate for reducing the minimum candidacy age.

    Conclusion

    • The need for a more inclusive and representative democracy demands a reevaluation of the minimum age requirements for parliamentary candidacy. As the world embraces youthful voices, India’s evolving landscape should not lag behind. A political consensus can pave the way for a more dynamic, inclusive, and progressive parliamentary system, with the potential to reshape the nation’s future.

  • Centre to overhaul British-era IPC, CrPC, Evidence Act

    overhaul

    Central Idea

    • Union Home Minister’s introduction of three crucial bills in the Lok Sabha has set the stage for a transformative shift in India’s criminal justice system.

    Overhauling Criminal Justice System

    • The 3 bills introduced are-
    1. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023,
    2. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023, and
    3. Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023
    • They are collectively aimed at replacing outdated laws, have sparked debates and anticipation of profound changes in legal proceedings.
    • The bills seek to repeal the archaic Indian Penal Code, the Indian Evidence Act, and the Code of Criminal Procedure, introducing a modern framework aligned with contemporary legal needs.

    Key Reforms Proposed:

    • Capital Punishment for Mob Lynching: The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill introduces capital punishment for mob lynching, emphasizing the gravity of this crime.
    • Stricter Laws for Sexual Violence: Deception leading to sexual relations is designated as a separate crime. False promise of marriage carries a ten-year imprisonment term.
    • Sedition and Terrorism Definitions: The bills redefine sedition and introduce a comprehensive definition of terrorism, separatism, and armed rebellion, streamlining the legal treatment of these offenses.
    • Video Recording of Survivor Statements: For sexual violence cases, the video-recording of survivor statements becomes mandatory, ensuring accurate and reliable evidence collection.
    • Speedy Justice: The bills propose amendments aimed at expediting the criminal justice system, aiming to bring revolutionary changes.
    • Transparency and Accountability: Police accountability is emphasized through measures such as providing complaint status within 90 days, consultation with victims before withdrawal of cases, and introduction of community service for specific crimes.

    Impact on Criminal Justice

    • Modernization: The bills signify a transition from colonial-era laws to contemporary legal frameworks that address evolving societal concerns.
    • Faster Trials: Proposed reforms, including fixed timelines for chargesheets and prosecution sanctions, aim to accelerate trial proceedings and curb undue delays.
    • Evidence Integrity: The mandatory videography of search and seizure enhances transparency and prevents tampering, ensuring the integrity of evidence.
    • Victim Empowerment: Consultation with victims before case withdrawal empowers them in the legal process, fostering a victim-centric approach.
    • Accountability and Streamlining: Designating a police officer for custody notifications, mandatory online disclosure, and limited remission of sentences promote transparency and accountability.

    Political and Social Implications

    • Political Accountability: The bills emphasize that individuals with political influence will not escape legal consequences, thereby promoting fairness and equality.
    • Public Safety: Stricter laws on mob lynching and sexual violence underscore the government’s commitment to ensuring public safety and protecting vulnerable groups.
    • Legal Efficacy: The bills aim to elevate India’s conviction rate by introducing forensic evidence collection standards and expediting trial proceedings.

    Conclusion

    • The introduction of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023, and its companion bills marks a significant step towards modernizing India’s criminal justice system.
    • These reforms, driven by the government’s commitment to transparency, accountability, and justice, hold the potential to reshape legal proceedings, empower victims, and ensure a more equitable legal environment.
    • As these bills undergo parliamentary scrutiny, the anticipation of their impact on India’s legal landscape is palpable, with expectations of a more efficient, effective, and just criminal justice system for the nation.

  • Many states refrain to implement PM-USHA Scheme

    Central Idea

    • States like Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal have not signed the required MoU for implementing the National Education Policy (NEP) under the PM-USHA scheme.
    • Concerns revolve around budget allocation and the absence of specific funds for NEP reforms.

    PM-USHA Scheme

    • The Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA) was introduced as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme to financially support institutions in States/UTs.
    • Its aim was to enhance access, equity, and excellence in higher education with improved efficiency, transparency, accountability, and responsiveness.
    • The initial phase of the scheme commenced in 2013, followed by the second phase in 2018.
    • In alignment with the National Education Policy, the RUSA initiative has been revamped as the Pradhan Mantri Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (PM-USHA).

    Challenges and Concerns

    • Lack of Additional Funds: The MoU requires states to undertake NEP-related administrative, academic, accreditation, and governance reforms. States are concerned that there are no extra funds designated specifically for NEP reforms within the scheme.
    • 40% State Contribution: States have to bear 40% of the expenses under the PM-USHA scheme, leading to further apprehensions about their ability to fund NEP initiatives.
    • Incomplete Alignment: The MoU doesn’t explicitly address the financial needs for implementing NEP changes, leading to dissatisfaction among some state governments.

    Government Response and Flexibility

    • Consultations and Integration: The University Grants Commission (UGC) chairman emphasizes the integration between NEP and PM-USHA through the MoU, which necessitates alignment with NEP principles.
    • Streamlined Approach: The PM-USHA scheme consolidates various components and offers states more flexibility in focusing on felt needs.
    • Focus on Prioritized Districts: States can identify priority districts based on enrollment ratios, gender parity, and demographic proportions, ensuring tailored educational interventions.

  • Debate around Article 370 in Supreme Court

    article 370

    Central Idea

    • There are ongoing Supreme Court deliberations regarding the abrogation of Article 370.
    • This article delves into the historical context, legal intricacies, and broader socio-political implications of this pivotal constitutional provision.

    Historical Context of Accession

    • Geo-Political Situation: Jammu and Kashmir’s unique special status originated from the tumultuous geo-political circumstances following India’s Independence and Partition.
    • Standstill Agreements: Maharaja Hari Singh’s decision to enter into “Standstill Agreements” with both India and Pakistan highlighted the State’s strategic positioning and economic interests.
    • Instrument of Accession: Faced with internal turmoil and external aggression, Maharaja Hari Singh’s Instrument of Accession sought India’s military assistance while retaining significant autonomy in internal matters.

    Evolution of Article 370

    • Instrument of Accession’s Reflection: Article 370 was crafted in line with the Instrument of Accession’s principles, preserving the unique terms of Jammu and Kashmir’s association with India.
    • Autonomy Preserved: This provision aimed to strike a balance between safeguarding the State’s autonomy and integrating it into the larger Indian Union.
    • Limited Legislative Authority: Article 370 outlined a limited scope for Parliament to legislate on certain subjects, primarily defense, foreign affairs, and communications, with consultation and concurrence requirements.
    • Special Relationship: This provision established Jammu and Kashmir’s distinct relationship with India, emphasizing that its integration would be contingent on mutual consent.

    Abrogation of Article 370

    • Long-Standing Opposition: The abrogation of Article 370 was a persistent demand of the mainstream political party and its precursor.
    • Multistage Process: The process of abrogation involved presidential orders, amendments, and parliamentary resolutions, culminating in its nullification.

    Petitioners’ Arguments against Revocation

    • Lack of Consultation: Senior litigant accused the Union government of ignoring the will of the people of Jammu and Kashmir during the Article 370 abrogation process.
    • Series of Executive Acts: He highlighted that the abrogation was executed through a series of executive acts, starting from the dissolution of the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly and state government.
    • Changing Provisions: He pointed out that the proviso to Article 370 (3) was altered to sidestep the need for the recommendation of the now-defunct Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly before rendering Article 370 inoperative.

    Nature of Relationship

    • Federal vs. Quasi-Federal: Litigant underscored that the relationship between the Union government and Jammu and Kashmir was purely federal, distinct from other states’ quasi-federal relationships.
    • Consent of the State: He argued that such significant decisions should have required the consent of the state and its people, considering the unique federal structure.

    CJI’s Inquiries

    • Permanent Character of Article 370: The CJI raised a significant question about the permanence of Article 370 in the Constitution. He inquired whether a constitutional amendment was required to transform its temporary nature into permanence.
    • Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly: He asked whether the absence of abrogation by the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly before its dissolution in 1957 should be considered as deeming Article 370 permanent.

    Supreme Court’s Interpretation

    Ans. No Comparison with Brexit-Type Referendum

    • Brexit Referendum: The CJI referenced the Brexit referendum as a political decision taken in the U.K. which does not align with India’s constitutional framework.
    • Uniqueness of Constitutional Democracy: India’s democracy is grounded in the Constitution, and thus decisions like Article 370’s abrogation involve adherence to established legal procedures.

    Conclusion

    • The ongoing courtroom exchange underlines the essence of constitutional democracy in India, wherein the expression of public opinion occurs through established democratic mechanisms.
    • The Chief Justice’s observations and the petitioners’ arguments shed light on the intricate balance between executive actions, parliamentary representation, and the preservation of constitutional principles.

  • What is President’s Assent?

    Central Idea

    • The President of India granted approval to four significant legislations, encompassing the Digital Personal Data Protection Act and a law related to controlling services in Delhi.
    • These Bills, recently endorsed during the Monsoon Session of Parliament, signify the nation’s resolve to adapt its legal framework to contemporary challenges.

    Legislations receiving President’s Assent

    • The Digital Personal Data Protection Act: This law aims to establish a framework to prevent the misuse of individuals’ data by online platforms. It addresses issues related to data privacy and protection in the digital realm. Tap here to read more.
    • The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act: This act provides for the establishment of a three-member authority responsible for handling the transfer and postings of Group A officers under the Delhi government. It pertains to the administration of services in the National Capital Territory of Delhi. Tap here to read more.
    • The Registration of Births and Deaths (Amendment) Act: This act designates digital birth certificates as the exclusive conclusive proof of age, which can be used for various purposes. It introduces the concept of digital certificates for births and deaths. Tap here to read more.
    • The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act: This act focuses on promoting ease of business by decriminalizing minor offenses. It introduces amendments to 183 provisions of 42 Acts to reduce legal complexities and facilitate business operations. Tap here to read more.

    What is President’s Assent?

    • Article 111 of the Indian Constitution governs the President’s assent to bills, which marks the final step in the legislative process.
    • The President possesses the power of veto, giving them three options under Article 111 when presented with a bill passed by Parliament:
      1. Assent: The President can give their approval to the bill, leading to its enactment as a law.
      2. Withhold Assent: The President can refuse to sign the bill, preventing it from becoming a law.
      3. Return for Reconsideration: If the bill is not a Money Bill, the President can send it back to Parliament for reconsideration. If Parliament passes the bill again, with or without amendments, the President must give their assent.

    Types of Veto

    • Absolute Veto: The President exercises this veto when refusing to sign a bill, causing it to be rejected and not turned into law. It is typically used when a Private Member’s Bill is used to pass a law or in the event of a change in the cabinet before the President’s signature, where the incoming government advises against signing the legislation.
    • Suspensive Veto: This allows the President to send a bill back to Parliament for further examination or deliberation. If Parliament reapproves the bill with or without amendments, it is adopted as law without the President’s veto.
    • Pocket Veto: In this form of veto, the President neither signs the bill nor sends it back to the legislature. The bill remains pending, and its outcome is uncertain. Unlike the U.S. President, the Indian President is not required to return the bill within a specific timeframe.
    • Qualified Veto: Unlike other types, this veto can be overridden by the legislature with a higher majority. However, this type of veto is not vested with the Indian President.

    [A] Assent to Ordinary Bill:

    For an ordinary bill, the President has three options:

    1. Assent: The President can sign the bill, transforming it into an act.
    2. Withhold Assent: The President can withhold their approval, resulting in the bill not becoming law.
    3. Return for Reconsideration: The President can send the bill back to the Houses for reconsideration. The Houses may amend the bill or not before returning it to the President for assent.

    [B] Assent to Money Bill:

    • The President can give or withhold assent to a Money Bill. However, a Money Bill cannot be returned by the President to the House for reconsideration under the Indian Constitution.

    [C] Assent to Constitutional Amendment Bill:

    • In the case of Constitutional Amendment Bills, the President’s assent is mandatory.
    • The President cannot withhold or return such bills; they become Constitutional Amendment Acts, modifying the Constitution in accordance with their provisions.

    Making a Law Operational

    • After receiving the President’s assent, a law becomes effective.
    • The government drafts guidelines and standards to operationalize the law.
    • Implementation requires the issuance of these guidelines.
    • Rules should be issued within 6 months of law passage, as recommended by the parliament.

    Try this PYQ from CSP 2022:

    Q. Consider the following statements:

    1. A bill amending the Constitution requires a prior recommendation of the President of India.
    2. When a Constitution Amendment Bill is presented to the President of India, it is obligatory for the President of India to give his/her assent.
    3. A Constitution Amendment Bill must be passed by both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha by a special majority and there is no provision for joint sitting.

    Which of the statements given above are correct?

    (a) 1 and 2 only

    (b) 2 and 3 only

    (c) 1 and 3 only

    (d) 1, 2 and 3

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”mauarwed43″ question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

  • Switzerland ambassador writes: A time-tested friendship with India

    Switzerland

    What’s the news?

    • On the 75th anniversary of the Treaty of Friendship, Switzerland and India commemorate a historic alliance that has fostered achievements in diverse sectors and look forward to deepening collaboration in areas like innovation, sustainable development, and healthcare.

    Central idea

    • In the annals of diplomatic history, the Treaty of Friendship and Establishment signed between Switzerland and India in 1948 stands as a testament to the enduring bond that has flourished for 75 years. As we commemorate this significant milestone, it is both opportune and prudent to reflect on the accomplishments achieved and envision the promising avenues that lie ahead.

    What is The Treaty of Friendship and Establishment?

    • The Treaty of Friendship and Establishment between Switzerland and India, signed in 1948, holds historical significance as one of India’s earliest diplomatic agreements after gaining independence.
    • It marked the establishment of formal diplomatic ties between the two nations and set the tone for their subsequent bilateral relationship.
    • This treaty emphasized mutual respect and cooperation, laying the groundwork for collaborations across various sectors such as vocational training, economic investments, technological exchange, and sustainable development.

    Historical Significance and Diverse Achievements

    • India’s Earliest Diplomatic Endeavors: The 1948 Treaty marked one of India’s earliest diplomatic endeavors and established a foundation of mutual respect. The ensuing decades witnessed fruitful cooperation in various sectors.
    • Investments in Skill Development: Switzerland’s investment in vocational training institutes and rail wagon factories aided India’s workforce development.
    • Milk Cooperatives: The establishment of milk farmer cooperatives in Kerala contributed to the dairy industry’s growth.
    • Technological Synergy: India’s IT expertise supported global undertakings, including Y2K bug resolution.
    • Climate-Friendly Innovation: Swiss-Indian collaboration led to Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3), a low-carbon cement alternative.
    • Economic Partnership: Switzerland’s position as India’s 12th largest foreign investor fostered economic growth.

    Future Trajectory in the Swiss-Indian Partnership

    • Swiss-Indian Innovation Platform:
    • An upcoming milestone, the Swiss-Indian Innovation Platform, is a testament to the commitment of both nations towards fostering innovation.
    • By harnessing the strengths of India’s technological advancements and Switzerland’s innovation prowess, this platform aims to address pressing global challenges.
    • Notably, the focus on combating Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) showcases the partnership’s practical relevance in tackling contemporary healthcare concerns.
    • Sustainable Development:
    • Both nations share a steadfast commitment to sustainable development.
    • Building on their historical collaboration, they are likely to channel their efforts towards joint initiatives that promote eco-friendly practices, address climate change, and ensure responsible resource utilization.
    • Healthcare Cooperation:
    • The partnership’s trajectory is expected to be marked by deeper collaboration in healthcare.
    • Drawing upon India’s technological prowess and Switzerland’s pharmaceutical innovations, joint ventures can pave the way for groundbreaking medical solutions, contributing to global health and well-being.
    • Investment and Trade:
    • Switzerland’s position as India’s 12th largest foreign investor underscores the depth of economic engagement.
    • With over 330 Swiss companies actively operating in India, this partnership has facilitated investment, job creation, and technology transfer, contributing to India’s economic growth.\
    • Free Trade Agreement:
    • Anticipating the horizon, discussions surrounding a Free Trade Agreement between the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and India hold immense promise.
    • This agreement not only deepens trade ties but also catalyzes increased investments and innovation in both regions, boosting economic vitality.
    • Shared Values, Shared Growth:
    • Built upon the foundation of shared values, the economic relationship is characterized by mutual respect and common interests.
    • The economic collaborations not only boost trade figures but also underscore the friendship’s ability to drive prosperity for both nations.

    Conclusion

    • As we celebrate this milestone, the trajectory ahead appears promising, anchored in sustainable development, innovative solutions, and cooperative endeavors. It is a tryst with destiny that not only celebrates past achievements but anticipates an even brighter future for the intertwined destinies of Switzerland and India.

    Also read:

    India Switzerland Relations

  • EC sticks to Assam Delimitation Draft

    Central Idea

    • Delimitation, the process of redrawing electoral boundaries to reflect population changes, is a crucial exercise that ensures fair representation and equal distribution of constituencies.
    • In Assam, the recent delimitation process has garnered attention due to its impact on political dynamics.

    Delimitation in Assam

    • Historical Basis: The last delimitation in Assam was based on 1971 census data by the Delimitation Commission in 1976. Over time, population shifts necessitate boundary adjustments.
    • Equitable Representation: Delimitation aims to ensure that the population of constituencies is relatively equal, promoting fair representation.
    • Legal Authority: Delimitation orders have the force of law and are beyond judicial review.

    Process of Delimitation

    • Delimitation Commission: An independent Delimitation Commission is formed, consisting of retired Supreme Court judges, the Chief Election Commissioner, and State Election Commissioners.
    • Objectives: The Commission determines boundaries and numbers of constituencies, striving for uniform population distribution.
    • Reserved Seats: The Commission identifies seats reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes based on their population concentrations.

    Implementation of Delimitation

    • Draft Proposals: The Commission publishes draft proposals in official gazettes and newspapers, seeking public feedback.
    • Public Sittings: Public hearings are held to gather opinions and objections.
    • Final Order: After considering objections and suggestions, the Commission issues a final order published in official gazettes, coming into effect as specified.

    Frequency of Delimitation

    • Early Delimitation: The first delimitation in 1950-51 was temporary, carried out by the President after India’s first general elections.
    • Need for Independence: Subsequent delimitation was mandated to be carried out by independent commissions following the dissatisfaction with the first exercise.
    • Past Instances: Delimitation occurred in 1952, 1963, 1973, and 2002, under Acts of respective years.

    Postponement and Justification

    • Frozen Seats: Delimitation was postponed after the 1981 and 1991 Censuses.
    • Uniform Growth Rate: Post the 2001 Census, an amendment delayed delimitation until 2026, justified by achieving uniform population growth throughout India.
    • Last Exercise: The most recent delimitation in Assam (2002-2008) adjusted boundaries based on 2001 Census data and reserved seat allocations.

    Conclusion

    • Delimitation plays a vital role in democratic governance, maintaining equitable representation by accounting for population shifts.
    • The recent delimitation in Assam, governed by a structured process and legal framework, exemplifies India’s commitment to fair and inclusive electoral practices.

  • PM mentions Katchatheevu Islands

    katchatheevu

    Central Idea

    • The island of Katchatheevu has emerged as a symbol of historical disputes, political contention, and a reminder of complex geopolitical decisions.
    • PM’s reference to Katchatheevu during a parliamentary debate added fuel to the ongoing discussions surrounding this small island, nestled between Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka.

    Katchatheevu Island: Historical Background

    • Colonial Influence: Katchatheevu, a 285-acre island, has its origins in a 14-century volcanic eruption. It was historically under the control of the Jaffna kingdom in Sri Lanka and later the Ramnad Zamindari in India.
    • British-Era Claims: Both India and Sri Lanka claimed Katchatheevu in the early 20th century to establish fishing boundaries. The ownership dispute continued even during the British Raj.

    1974 Indo-Sri Lankan Maritime Agreement

    • Landmark Decision: Indira Gandhi’s government decided to cede Katchatheevu to Sri Lanka as part of the 1974 agreement, aiming to establish maritime borders.
    • Political Implications: The decision raised concerns in Tamil Nadu, where voices protested the lack of state assembly consultation and the impact on traditional fishing rights.
    • Fishing Ambiguity: The agreement allowed Indian fishermen access to Katchatheevu “hitherto,” but fishing rights remained ambiguous, leading to disputes.

    Sri Lankan Civil War and Beyond

    • Civil War Dynamics: The Sri Lankan civil war (1983-2009) shifted focus from the Katchatheevu issue as Sri Lanka’s naval forces grappled with internal strife.
    • Post-War Reality: Post the civil war, Sri Lanka reinforced maritime defense, leading to the arrest of Indian fishermen venturing into their waters, reigniting demands for Katchatheevu’s retrieval.

    Tamil Nadu’s Persistent Concerns

    • Political Backlash: Tamil Nadu politicians across parties raised objections against ceding Katchatheevu without state assembly consent, citing historical ties and livelihood impacts.
    • Legal Battles: Late J Jayalalitha’s AIADMK filed petitions challenging the 1974 agreement, arguing it affected traditional fishing rights. However, the Union government’s stance remained unaltered.
    • Modi Government’s Position: Despite vocal demands from Tamil politicians, the Modi government maintained that the island’s status was finalized in 1974 and reclaiming it would require drastic measures.

    Contemporary Implications

    • Symbol of Sovereignty: Katchatheevu symbolizes regional and sovereignty concerns, reflecting tensions between Tamil Nadu’s interests and central government decisions.
    • Geopolitical Dilemma: The case highlights the delicate balance between historical claims, political sentiments, and international agreements in the context of bilateral relations.

    Conclusion

    • The island of Katchatheevu continues to serve as a reminder of India’s historical intricacies, reflecting the delicate balancing act between state interests, national decisions, and regional aspirations.
    • While Tamil Nadu’s calls for retrieval echo in the political corridors, the longstanding 1974 agreement and subsequent geopolitical realities create a complex landscape.
    • As the island’s fate intertwines with broader diplomatic relations, Katchatheevu remains a testament to the complexities of national sovereignty and regional sentiment.

  • Bill to Redefine the Election Commission Selection Process

    Central Idea

    • A new Bill has been proposed in the Rajya Sabha aimed at reversing the impact of a Supreme Court ruling on the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs).
    • The proposed legislation suggests a revamped selection process, featuring a committee comprising the Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and a nominated Cabinet Minister.
    • This initiative comes after a Supreme Court verdict that demanded the participation of the PM, Leader of Opposition, and ‘CJI’ in the selection of these crucial electoral positions.

    Supreme Court’s Ruling and Legislative Vacuum

    • March 2 Verdict: A unanimous verdict by a SC bench this year mandated the involvement of the PM, Leader of Opposition, and CJI in the appointment of CEC and ECs.
    • Constitutional Vacuum: The Court intervened due to the absence of a parliamentary law as prescribed by Article 324 of the Constitution for the appointment process.

    New Legislative Approach

    • Aim of the Bill: The proposed Bill aims to address the constitutional vacuum and establish a structured legislative process for the appointment of members to the Election Commission of India (ECI).
    • Search Committee: The Bill establishes a Search Committee, led by the Cabinet Secretary and composed of two other government officials knowledgeable about election matters. The Committee is tasked with preparing a panel of five potential candidates for appointment.
    • Selection Committee: The core of the proposed process is the Selection Committee, composed of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and a Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister. This committee would finalize the appointment of CEC and ECs.

    Supreme Court’s Concerns

    • Parliament’s Authority: The Parliament holds the power to address the issues highlighted by the Supreme Court ruling and nullify its impact through legislative action that aligns with the judgment’s intent.
    • Preserving Independence: The Supreme Court’s ruling emphasized the need for an independent body overseeing elections, aligning with the Constitution’s original intent.

    Concerns raised

    • Composition of Selection Committee: The new Bill raises concerns about the independence of the selection process due to its composition.
    • Absence of LoP: With the PM and a nominated Cabinet Minister holding the majority in the three-member panel, the Leader of Opposition’s voice is marginalized even before the process begins.
    • Omits CJI: The Bill omits CJI from the panel counterviewing the 2nd March Judgment which prompted this legislation.

    Conclusion

    • The proposed Bill’s attempt to address the legislative vacuum created by the Supreme Court ruling is a significant step towards streamlining the appointment process for the Election Commission.
    • While the Parliament has the authority to shape the process, ensuring the true independence and integrity of the selection process remains a critical concern.
    • The balance between various stakeholders must be maintained to uphold the sanctity of India’s democratic electoral processes.